From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12450 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2004 16:03:17 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 30 Nov 2004 16:03:17 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CZATF-000266-MH for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 30 Nov 2004 16:03:17 +0000 Received: (qmail 32234 invoked by uid 89); 30 Nov 2004 16:02:54 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 32138 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2004 16:02:53 +0000 From: Mike Gardiner To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <610e3466041130071933f743a0@mail.gmail.com> References: <1101753879.32291.11.camel@mymach.qrypto.org> <64652.216.125.51.60.1101761343.squirrel@216.125.51.60> <1101790229.14250.29.camel@mymach.qrypto.org> <1101768789.8811.1.camel@localhost> <610e3466041130071933f743a0@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:54:47 +0800 Message-Id: <1101801287.8811.9.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] FEATURES_maketest_question X-Archives-Salt: 0ccf32e0-81e0-4eb4-8e85-67fb81ade10e X-Archives-Hash: e8a139a34e0d70c9d04319dddb22ef48 > Personally, I use it because it gives me extra checks that a package > is working correctly before I merge into my system and potentially > break things. Since I am mostly using non-x86 this becomes more > likely. So peace of mind is your motivation? > Btw, if we (as users) run into a package that fails maketest, is opening > a bug the right thing to do? I can't speak for all packages, but for GNOME packages, we'll take patches you can provide that fix "make test" errors, but we don't have time to look into fixing the tests ourselves. Unfortunately, "make test" isn't uniformly adhered to upstream, and in my experience, the tests that are conducted with it are often outdated, and/or unmaintained. In these cases, "make test" doesn't provide any indication of the state of the software - if it's runnable/testable/linkable/however the tests are conducted. This said, I'm not aware of (any?) Gentoo policy/stance on this, if anyone can fill me in on that, please do. Mike Gardiner (Obz) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list